Manago v. Beard et al

Filing 8

ORDER DENYING 6 Plaintiff's Motion for Relief and ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, Without Prejudice, for Failure to Pay Filing Fee signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 5/4/2016. CASE CLOSED. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

STEWART MANAGO,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.
JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00293-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
RELIEF AND DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT
PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO PAY FILING
FEE
[ECF Nos. 6 & 7]

Plaintiff Stewart Manago is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983 filed on March 3, 2016.

19

On March 9, 2016, the magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations denying

20

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis because Plaintiff has suffered three or more strikes

21

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and Plaintiff failed to demonstrate he was in imminent danger. (ECF No.

22

3.) The Findings and Recommendations were adopted in full on March 30, 2016, and Plaintiff was

23

directed to pay the $400.00 filing fee within thirty days or the action would be dismissed. (ECF No.

24

5.) The thirty day time frame has expired and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee. However, on April

25

11, 2016, Plaintiff filed a motion for relief from the March 30, 2016, order, along with a first amended

26

complaint. (ECF Nos. 6 & 7.) The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, filed April

27

11, 2016, and it suffers from the same defects as the original complaint. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff

28

references only vague and past incidents of retaliation and failure to protect him from potential future
1

1

harm. (Id.) Indeed, as stated in the Findings and Recommendations, Plaintiff’s claims of failure to

2

protect are vague and conclusory and devoid of sufficient factual support. There are no allegations

3

that Plaintiff is presently in imminent danger of physical harm, and Plaintiff makes no request for

4

relief from imminent danger and requests only monetary damages. Accordingly, Plaintiff is ineligible

5

to proceed in forma pauperis in this action. Therefore, this case must be dismissed, without prejudice,

6

for failure to pay the filing fee.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

May 4, 2016

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2